On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 07:28:00PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote: > Move the SRAM and shared memory binding for SCPI into the existing > Generic on-chip SRAM. We just need to update the compatible list and > there-by remove the whole old text format binding for the same. > > Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx> > --- > .../devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scpi.txt | 15 --------------- > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sram/sram.yaml | 1 + > 2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 15 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scpi.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scpi.txt > index bcd6c3ec471e..bcb8b3d61e68 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scpi.txt > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scpi.txt > @@ -56,21 +56,6 @@ Sub-nodes > node. It can be non linear and hence provide the mapping of identifiers > into the clock-output-names array. > > -SRAM and Shared Memory for SCPI > -------------------------------- > - > -A small area of SRAM is reserved for SCPI communication between application > -processors and SCP. > - > -The properties should follow the generic mmio-sram description found in [3] > - > -Each sub-node represents the reserved area for SCPI. > - > -Required sub-node properties: > -- reg : The base offset and size of the reserved area with the SRAM > -- compatible : should be "arm,scp-shmem" for Non-secure SRAM based > + - arm,scpi-shmem Which is correct? There's not a single other occurrance in the kernel tree of either. Rob
